lct Posted November 3, 2021 Share #581 Posted November 3, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just now, Artin said: Steven I bet anything there is probably not a single person in this world that can tell the difference in the Image between a steel rim and the V2 Still rim i don't know but v2 keeps some sharpness at f/1.4 whereas v1 looks significantly softer. It is a feeling i had for many years and Steven's pics are confirming it to me. Not to say that i prefer v1 though but this is subjective obviously . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 3, 2021 Posted November 3, 2021 Hi lct, Take a look here 35mm 1.4 Summilux pre-asph. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted November 3, 2021 Share #582 Posted November 3, 2021 2 hours ago, Steven said: 1. Steel Rim from batch 206 and 216 - around 22K for 206 and 25k for 216, very hard to find 2. Steel Rim from batch 176 and 177 - around 15k 3. V2 infinity lock Brass from batch 216 and very early 222- around 7,5k 4. V2 infinity lock Brass from batch 222, 229 and 234 - around 5K 5. V2 Titane - around 4K Thank Bog for Voigtlander's 35mm f/1.4 Nokton I/II. 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2021 Share #583 Posted November 3, 2021 Lovely, Arthur - there’s a coolness and calmness in these images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2021 Share #584 Posted November 3, 2021 You should consider one of the Monochrom cameras, Arthur - I think your images are stronger in B&W … Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 3, 2021 Share #585 Posted November 3, 2021 1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said: Mostly, I haven’t seen a photo taken with an old lens that wouldn’t have been better taken with a more modern one, or with a Canon, Nikon or whatever - not to say these old lens photos aren’t good; just the lens has played a subsidiary role to the skill of the photographer. A bit off-topic but probably more interesting than the original one. As ever and maybe even more so in this case better is undefinable and unquantifiable but I can't imagine some photographs taken by the great pictorialists like Misonne, Emerson, Julia Margaret Cameron and so many others be better without the special rendering of their "flawed" lenses. Would Steichen's Pond or Flatiron Building be better if he had used some APO ASPH lens? I honestly don't think that the role of these lenses where subsidiary and in fact show us just how skilled these photographers were. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 3, 2021 Share #586 Posted November 3, 2021 16 minutes ago, Steven said: Excellent 👌🏻 Agreed. Particulary the first one! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2021 Share #587 Posted November 3, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) 41 minutes ago, ianman said: A bit off-topic but probably more interesting than the original one. As ever and maybe even more so in this case better is undefinable and unquantifiable but I can't imagine some photographs taken by the great pictorialists like Misonne, Emerson, Julia Margaret Cameron and so many others be better without the special rendering of their "flawed" lenses. Would Steichen's Pond or Flatiron Building be better if he had used some APO ASPH lens? I honestly don't think that the role of these lenses where subsidiary and in fact show us just how skilled these photographers were. Or, put the other way, would those two famous images by Edward Steichen be worse, taken with a modern APO ASPH lens? Or, more provocatively, was he using the best, most modern lenses available to him? We may be seeing different things, but the appeal of those images to me is their composition and the atmosphere provided by the lighting, or lack of it. Robert Frank is reported to have said the least important aspect of his images was the equipment he used. He did favour a Leica LTM camera, but most often use a Nikon threadmount lens … 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 3, 2021 Share #588 Posted November 3, 2021 1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said: Or, put the other way, would those two famous images by Edward Steichen be worse, taken with a modern APO ASPH lens? Or, more provocatively, was he using the best, most modern lenses available to him? worse/best, again are not appropriate terms IMO. They would certainly not have the same mood if taken with a modern lens. Perhaps my choice of genre was cheating somewhat, we must remember that these people (pictorialists) were attempting to duplicate the mood of impressionist paintings. It’s a good point about his choice of lens, I don’t have the knowledge to answer that but I certainly think their choice of lens was made in full knowledge of their qualities. Pictorialism wasn’t the only genre. The choice of lens is just as much a part of the skill and knowledge of the photographer as the ability to expose and compose to achieve the desired result. 1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said: We may be seeing different things, but the appeal of those images to me is their composition and the atmosphere provided by the lighting, or lack of it. That is precisely my point, the atmosphere rendered very much depends how the light behaves when going through the lens. The light may behave better when going through a highly corrected lens but it would not have the same mood at all. After that better or worse is personal taste. Maybe this will help explain my point. Would you prefer to listen to Bach played by an ensemble using period instruments or the same music played by Wendy Carlos on a modular Synthesizer? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2021 Share #589 Posted November 3, 2021 It would be interesting to know what lenses Steichen used, and with that, what film was used, paper stock and what went on in the dark room ... My choice of Bach is limited to period instruments or a synthesiser? I have recordings of Bach on both period and modern instruments. To take my point, though, Bach wrote his music for the current instruments - he did compose for animal skin drums and nose flutes ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 3, 2021 Share #590 Posted November 3, 2021 I have no idea about the lenses. I’ll take a look at that. I’ve always assumed he used glass rather than film but again, I really have no idea. I reckon quite a lot went on in the darkroom, hand colouring The Pond prints for a start. This is partly why I mentioned that my comparison may be cheating somewhat. My suggestion of period instrument or synth was in direct response to you first comment which was: 14 hours ago, IkarusJohn said: …I haven’t seen a photo taken with an old lens that wouldn’t have been better taken with a more modern one … Maybe I misunderstood that. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 3, 2021 Share #591 Posted November 3, 2021 7 minutes ago, Artin said: hey guys come up and play with me Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Brilliantly seen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted November 3, 2021 Share #592 Posted November 3, 2021 (edited) 38 minutes ago, ianman said: ...worse/best, again are not appropriate terms IMO. They would certainly not have the same mood if taken with a modern lens... ...Would you prefer to listen to Bach played by an ensemble using period instruments or the same music played by Wendy Carlos on a modular Synthesizer?... Agree fully with the first bit. The famous snap of Sir John Herschel by J. M. Cameron is a case in point. It might 'suffer' from many different technical inadequacies but as a portrait of the sitter? Utterly sublime. Can't imagine what it would have been like taken on an M10-R at f8 with a 50mm APO Summicron... As far as the second bit goes we could well go off at a strange tangent (considering the OP) but it would be naive to believe that the composers of the day didn't strive for 'better' instruments than what was currently available. Beethoven (I do know just how much you like the 'Romantics', Ian!) being one of the most vociferous in his search for what he considered to be neccessary improvements in the area of pianos especially. The Stradivarius violins are reckoned - by many of the top players - to be tonally slightly inferior to instruments by the likes of Amati and Guarneri. Where the 'Strad' scores heavily is that by using a slightly different constructional design Stradivari's instruments were considerably louder and could be heard more clearly in the recent (at the time) trend for having larger and larger concert halls. Oh, and by the way; I do rather enjoy the Jaques Loussier Trio's rendition of many of J.S. Bach's stuff when I'm in the right mood... Going on-topic just for a mo' I've just picked up a '74 35 Summilux and I can see it will be giving my 40mm f1.4 Voigt. Nokton some worries in the 'favourite' stakes. Philip. Edited November 3, 2021 by pippy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2021 Share #593 Posted November 3, 2021 44 minutes ago, ianman said: I have no idea about the lenses. I’ll take a look at that. I’ve always assumed he used glass rather than film but again, I really have no idea. I reckon quite a lot went on in the darkroom, hand colouring The Pond prints for a start. This is partly why I mentioned that my comparison may be cheating somewhat. My suggestion of period instrument or synth was in direct response to you first comment which was: Maybe I misunderstood that. A more modern instrument isn’t necessarily electronic … Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 4, 2021 Share #594 Posted November 4, 2021 21 minutes ago, pippy said: I do know just how much you like the 'Romantics', Ian! 😂 21 minutes ago, pippy said: it would be naive to believe that the composers of the day didn't strive for 'better' instruments than what was currently available. Did they have a SUF (Stradivarius Users Forum) and get into snail mail fights about the rumoured forthcoming Stradilux? I may have not made my point very well but it was not about what was available at the time, be it instruments or lenses. But rather that a modern electronic instrument or modern lens, due to their more perfect design are less suited for the piece of music/photo created. Anyway its just an opinion, not at matter of life and death, there is no right or wrong. I’m just happy to be able to have a good and interesting discussion with you and John. Something of a rarity on LUF these days. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 4, 2021 Share #595 Posted November 4, 2021 16 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said: A more modern instrument isn’t necessarily electronic … no but it wouldn’t be much of an argument if I had written a 17th century violin and an 18th century violin ( although I’m sure Philip will have something to say about that). I made the difference radical to make the point more obvious. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted November 4, 2021 Share #596 Posted November 4, 2021 1 minute ago, ianman said: ...Did they have a SUF (Stradivarius Users Forum) and get into snail mail fights about the rumoured forthcoming Stradilux?... Yes! Apparently the most popular threads were those along the lines of "What colour of rosin would you recommend for my bow if I use cat-gut strings?"... Philip. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 4, 2021 Share #597 Posted November 4, 2021 8 minutes ago, pippy said: Yes! Apparently the most popular threads were those along the lines of "What colour of rosin would you recommend for my bow if I use cat-gut strings?"... Philip. Then some smarta*se would start making jokes about where to get the best bowjob. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 4, 2021 Share #598 Posted November 4, 2021 39 minutes ago, ianman said: no but it wouldn’t be much of an argument if I had written a 17th century violin and an 18th century violin ( although I’m sure Philip will have something to say about that). I made the difference radical to make the point more obvious. You’re arguing with yourself, in that case, Ian! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted November 4, 2021 Share #599 Posted November 4, 2021 16 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said: You’re arguing with yourself, in that case, Ian! Well it’s one way to win an argument 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
803CGN Posted November 4, 2021 Share #600 Posted November 4, 2021 Bought 35 f1.4 Summilux in '65 with first M. Flat images. Soft. Traded it quickly for Summicron. Happy move. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now